ImmigrationHow immigration court works

By Fatma Marouf

When Attorney General Jeff Sessions on 11 June overruled the decision in a controversial immigration case called Matter of A-B-, he made it harder for women escaping sexual and physical abuse to qualify for asylum in the United States.

Can the U.S. attorney general unilaterally overturn a court case?

Yes, because, as I teach my surprised law students, immigration judges are not part of the judicial branch. They are attorneys in the Department of Justice.

That means normal assumptions about judicial independence and freedom from political influence do not apply in immigration proceedings.

How immigration trials work
People end up in immigration court for various reasons.

Refugees who fled persecution in their country can apply for asylum in the U.S. People facing deportation may request “cancellation of removal,” which allows them to stay in the country. Other noncitizens may be in the process of becoming a legal permanent U.S. resident.

Their cases will be heard by one of approximately 330 immigration judges who preside over 58 U.S. immigration courts. As of March 2018, these courts had 345,000 active cases, which averages out to about 1,000 cases per judge.

That’s double the caseload of federal district court judges, and immigration courts have tighter budgets and far less administrative support.

As a result, the immigration court system is congested. Cases can take years to complete.

Immigration judges issued 137,875 decisions in 2016, according to DOJ statistics. Just under 70 percent were deportation orders.

Who does what?
Immigration proceedings look much like a criminal trial, but the process does not come with the same constitutional protections.